Tricks for Timing

[tcarilli]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan

use "thats a" and then make the call.

How does this help? Timing (proper use of eyes) is important to help us get calls right not make calls more slowly. Suppose you don't track the ball, ie have tunnel vision, but you are religious in using the "thats a" method of timing instead of tracking pitches all the way to the mitt, how many more pitches are you going to get right?

[Jay R]

I don't use any mechanisms like the ones that have been mentionned. Although I will periodically remind myself to be patient and not make up my mind before the ball crosses the plate and into the glove.

For me, there are two common situations that could be problematic. They are basically the same pitches that fool the hitters.

One is the high fastball that looks good coming in. Batters often swing at that pitch because it looks like a strike. if the batters are sometimes fooled, we can be as well. If you're patient, you will not miss it.

Secondly is the sinker that again that looks good all the way until it dips below the strike zone at the last instant. It often fools the batter and we need to let it be caught before we decide.

I think it was Peter Osbourne who wrote about gross misses (calls that everyone in the ballpark knows you missed). Good timing help avoid gross misses.

[Don Mueller]

Originally Posted by Jay R

One is the high fastball that looks good coming in. Batters often swing at that pitch because it looks like a strike.

One is the high fastball that looks good coming in. Batters often swing at that pitch because it looks like a strike..... then it rises out of the zone and unless we watch it all the way to the mitt we may be fooled as well.

[Tim C]

" . . . then it rises out of the zone and unless we watch it all the way to the mitt we may be fooled as well."

Well at a bare minimum someone has a sense of humor this morning.

Regards,

[RPatrino]

It's not so much that the ball rises as much as it is that the F2, batter and umpire actually drop as the pitch is arriving at the plate. It is a well known fact as many fields dip for drainage.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Jon Bible gave excellent advice about the strike zone.

1. Every Pitch is a strike until proven otherwise


Pete Booth

If that advice is excellent, here's some that's awesome:

No pitch is either a ball or a strike until after it reaches the catcher's mitt.

A bias or predisposition toward a certain outcome might lead to quicker games. It certainly leads to an improper zone if you want to advance in adult baseball (college-aged and older).

Bible's advice might be OK for established umpires, although I find that partners who follow it tend to have strike zones that are unfairly large. Beginners who follow that advice are practically guaranteed that result, and they make enough mistakes in that direction as it is.

I don't know who said it, but I think it's sometimes attributed to Doug Harvey:

"The batter's got a right to make a living, too."

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Timing tricks are bogus, and newer umps should learn the proper use of the eyes instead.

What would those be?

[fitump56]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

It's not so much that the ball rises as much as it is that the F2, batter and umpire actually drop as the pitch is arriving at the plate. It is a well known fact as many fields dip for drainage.

Mound 18"+ over plate elevation.
F1 releases ball @ 1' minimum over his head.
F1 is 5' tall (OK he's a mijit)

Ball arrives @ the plate at 6' elevation (OK it's Wilt The Stilt)

1.5' + 1+ +5' = 7.5'
7.5'-6' = no rise.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Publius

If that advice is excellent, here's some that's awesome:

No pitch is either a ball or a strike until after it reaches the catcher's mitt.

A bias or predisposition toward a certain outcome might lead to quicker games. It certainly leads to an improper zone if you want to advance in adult baseball (college-aged and older).

Bible's advice might be OK for established umpires, although I find that partners who follow it tend to have strike zones that are unfairly large. Beginners who follow that advice are practically guaranteed that result, and they make enough mistakes in that direction as it is.

I don't know who said it, but I think it's sometimes attributed to Doug Harvey:

"The batter's got a right to make a living, too."

I must have read Jon Bible's column in Referee Magazine too when I first started out, because that has always been my philosophy. It isn't a bias or a predisposition to calling it one way or the other. I would still always track the pitch into the glove, and then make my determination based on the final outcome. I endeavored never to ever judge a pitch early. But I learned that the baseball comes in on a railroad track, and that track is a "strike." If anything derails the ball off the track, it then is considered a "ball." But it is definitely a strike leaving the pitcher's hand. But as we all know, that can change rather quickly. . .

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

I must have read Jon Bible's column in Referee Magazine too when I first started out, because that has always been my philosophy. It isn't a bias or a predisposition to calling it one way or the other. I would still always track the pitch into the glove, and then make my determination based on the final outcome. I endeavored never to ever judge a pitch early. But I learned that the baseball comes in on a railroad track, and that track is a "strike." If anything derails the ball off the track, it then is considered a "ball." But it is definitely a strike leaving the pitcher's hand. But as we all know, that can change rather quickly. . .

With all respect to Jon, I prefer the old adage: the pitch is nothing until I call it. I have no bias towards ball or strike until it hits the golve.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

i work with a umpire whose creedo is, get em to 2 strikes as soon as you can (assuming the batter doesnt hit it first!). he calls a b i g zone to get the batter to 2strikes as fast as he can then he calls a REAL strikezone if you get what im sayin. he says this sppeeds the game and gets batterss swinging.

is this a good idea? im not realy comfertable with it.


(Whew see no big caps this time!)

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

i work with a umpire whose creedo is, get em to 2 strikes as soon as you can (assuming the batter doesnt hit it first!). he calls a b i g zone to get the batter to 2strikes as fast as he can then he calls a REAL strikezone if you get what im sayin. he says this sppeeds the game and gets batterss swinging.

is this a good idea? im not realy comfertable with it.


(Whew see no big caps this time!)

So he purposefully changes the strike zone not only during the game, but during the same at bat. And you're asking if this is a good idea?

Wow.

[UmpLarryJohnson]

well i dont do that but its not MY place to tel him hes wrong

[BigTex]

Originally Posted by UmpLarryJohnson

well i dont do that but its not MY place to tel him hes wrong

.....yes it is!

[UmpLarryJohnson]

Originally Posted by BigTex

.....yes it is!

hes a bigdog as you guys say often so nope i let him defend it with the rats. he knows what hes doing and why (even tho its a bad idea imo), so he can face the music